US Polls Show Widespread Opposition to War on Iran as It Enters Its Second Week

The joint US-Israeli aggression on Iran entered its second week amidst a state of severe internal division in the United States, as the latest opinion poll data showed that the vast majority of citizens do not support the continuation of this military conflict. According to the results of a poll conducted by Quinnipiac University, about 53% of respondents oppose military operations against Tehran, while the percentage of supporters did not exceed 40%, reflecting a significant gap between the White House's direction and American public opinion.

The figures indicate an excessive sensitivity to ground intervention, as 74% of voters expressed their categorical rejection of sending US ground forces to Iranian territory, while a small percentage of only 20% supported this approach. This popular rejection comes at a time when questions are increasing about the strategic utility of escalation, especially since 55% of Americans believe that Iran does not pose an imminent and direct threat to US security at present.

On the political front, President Donald Trump faces increasing pressure to demand transparency, as 59% of survey participants affirmed the necessity for the President to return to Congress to obtain legislative approval before proceeding with military operations. Also, 62% of Americans believe that the current administration has failed to provide a clear and logical explanation for the reasons that necessitated launching this widespread military attack, which negatively affected the President's popularity, which declined to 37%.

In the context of political warnings, Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal expressed his deep concern after a closed briefing in Congress, indicating that current indicators are pushing towards deploying American soldiers on the ground to achieve potential objectives. Blumenthal clarified that the Trump administration is required to provide sufficient explanations to the public about the risks soldiers face in the region, considering this war to be the presidency's choice, not the choice of the American people who are cautiously watching developments.

On the ground, military operations began on February 28, and witnessed a significant escalation that included Iran launching more than 2000 missiles and drones targeting vital facilities in Gulf countries. The UAE received the largest share of these attacks, while the Sitra refinery in Bahrain was directly targeted on March 9, resulting in human casualties and severe material damage to oil infrastructure.

The war caused a near-complete paralysis of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz for the tenth consecutive day, which is the waterway through which about 20% of the world's oil and liquefied natural gas supplies flow. This closure prompted Saudi Aramco to warn of catastrophic consequences for the stability of global energy markets, especially with the decline in crude oil production in the Middle East by about 4.9 million barrels per day since the outbreak of the confrontation.

Economically, oil markets witnessed sharp fluctuations, with the price per barrel jumping to $119 at the peak of the escalation before falling to levels of $86, amidst international fears of continued supply disruptions. Major countries in the region such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE were forced to reduce their production and close vital refineries such as Al-Ruwaise and Ras Tanura as a result of direct security threats and drone attacks that targeted facilities.

Inside Iran, the weekend saw the appointment of a new Supreme Leader for the country in a move aimed at organizing the internal situation to face external military pressures. Despite assurances from US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that the conflict remains under control, the reduction of embassy staff in the region reflects the extent of concerns about the expansion of the confrontation and its transformation into a comprehensive regional war whose end cannot be predicted.

International positions were not far from the scene, as German Chancellor Friedrich Merz expressed his deep concern about the absence of a clear vision or exit plan to end this war. In contrast, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt insists that the end of military operations is linked to achieving what she described as 'unconditional surrender' from the Iranian side, a high bar that may prolong the conflict and its human and material costs.

Reports indicate that Russia and China are providing indirect support to Tehran, which further complicates the military and political landscape for Washington and its allies. With the US midterm elections approaching, observers believe that the lack of public support for the war could be a major obstacle for the Republican Party, especially since previous wars began with popular momentum that later eroded, while this war began with prior popular rejection.

In conclusion, the situation in the Strait of Hormuz and oil facilities in Iraq and the Gulf remains the primary driver of global concern, as production in southern Iraq's fields has decreased by 70%. With missiles and drones continuing to be intercepted over Bahrain and neighboring countries, the region faces open scenarios, amidst the US administration's insistence on achieving its military objectives despite growing internal opposition and warnings of a global economic catastrophe.

This war was not chosen by the American people, but by the President, and it seems that we are heading towards deploying troops in Iran to achieve vague objectives.